Contributed by: AnchorsAnchors(others by this writer | submit your own)Published on July 8th 2005I played soccer for a number of years when I was younger, and it seems like at least twice a game the ref would throw out the yellow card. It was usually a small trip or a bit of shoving that would warrant the card, where as the hard slide tackles from behind or malicious kicks to the legs were give.

I played soccer for a number of years when I was younger, and it seems like at least twice a game the ref would throw out the yellow card. It was usually a small trip or a bit of shoving that would warrant the card, where as the hard slide tackles from behind or malicious kicks to the legs were given the red card. It was because of this that I still regard yellow carding as being pretty wimpy, and Jacksonville, Florida's pop-punk notables Yellowcard have done nothing to change this tradition of wimpery. Well, believe it or not, Yellowcard haven't always been token pop-punk MTV darlings, and Where We Stand takes you back to those humble beginnings of the late 1990's.

Those humble beginnings included a vastly different sound from what the band is putting out today; it's not a complete 180, but save the inclusion of the violin in various spots, you'd be hard pressed to say they're the same band. Ben Dobson and Todd Clary had a lot to do with their sound of old, as the singer and guitarist, respectively, are no longer in the band, but it's those two musicians who put all the bite in back then that the band is currently lacking. Dobson's scruffy, rough-around-the-edges vocal approach gave this band some toughness that it's sorely lacking in their current incarnation. The gritty guitar playing fuels a lot of these songs, and instills energy and a genuine urgency that's no longer apparent. This was a much different band. There's a lot of challenging rhythms coming from Clary's direction, and he also contributes a fair amount of backing vocals throughout these 10 songs.

I'm not trying to say this is anything groundbreaking, and a lot of the recordings are a bit dusty, but at the same time they show the band in a much more genuine and talented light than they appear in now. "Time Will Tell" shows off some great guitar work from Clary, and the early integration of what's now their staple, Sean Mackin's violin work. There's a real energy and vigor to it, and it's still used too sparsely to be considered anything special, but when it's included, it has the ability to add that extra something to a song that would have otherwise been pretty generic. "Kids" is probably the best track on the album, with some great starts and stops, and extremely fluid guitar and drum interplay between Clary and their drummer. That interplay is just not something found in any of Yellowcard's later recordings, because the focus is much too formulaic to give any individual members, save the occasional violin spot, a chance to show their talents.

Navigating through a few rough patches, the band really seemed to be a solid punk rock outfit 6 long years ago. Lineup shifts and dreams of grandeur have taken their attention away from playing with bands like In My Eyes and Kid Dynamite to catering to the TRL crown when there's no new Good Charlotte video in rotation.

Also of note is the booklet accompanying the liner notes that the band has included. It's a pretty thick booklet with a good amount of full color pictures of live performances and random pictures of the members. Also included here are the lyrics to "Time Will Tell," but only "Time Will Tell." No other lyrics are anywhere to be found, so obviously the band found some importance in their words on that particular track; "See what the cause has left us, there's no strength to minimize, they try so hard to change us but we don't see out conscious eyes." Words like that seem far more profound than any recollections of "Ocean Avenue."

For you Yellowcard fans, I know a few are still hiding in the corner, you'd do well to pick this up and see where the band has come from. The rest of you very well may enjoy this as well; it's a nice jolt of punk rock with some youthful enthusiasm to boot.

well, I'd like to thank anchors for finally saying something nice about my guitar work and vocals... i appreciate it. I'd also like to say watching Yellowcard self-destruct from the inside I can personally vouch that the changes were ONLY to get radio and tv play. that was the sole reason behind myself and bens untimely exit.Basically me and Ben didn't want to be whinny corporate sychophants and all the old school Yellowcard nay-sayers should suck a dick... neecheewa bitchs...
p.s. Ryan key.... any time, any place.... head? chest? or foot??

I've also noticed that he starts most of his reviews the same way, but I happen to like it. Until I read the comments section, I was about to post that I liked the first paragraph.

Anonymous (July 11, 2005)

bottom line, fuck anchors and fuck you all.

-gabe saporta

Anonymous (July 9, 2005)

"you're the reviewing equivalent of Pennywise."

no matter how you feel about anchors reviews....

you gotta admit thats funny.

Anonymous (July 9, 2005)

Fair enough. I'm not taking issue as such, I'd just come in from work when i posted first, i was tired and pissed off, it just bugs the hell out of me when I read your reviews and they sound like a junior thesis of some kind, before kicking into the meat of the review. I have no beef with you as such, as there's at least 500 people who have submitted to this site who's writing is more flawed than yours, it's just there was one day where the only reviews posted were yours, and every one had that kinda intro. Since then, it's just pissed me off.

I'm not 'taking issue' as such, it's just i couldn't keep quiet when theres a big section at the bottom of the reviews begging me to comment. It annys me when people rip my reviews for no reason, and while i could have gone about my comments more constructively, I do feel I have a valid point.

I realize what you're saying, and yes, the majority of my reviews adhere to the same type of introductory formula, but I find that in other peoples reviews, that I read, I prefer that style over "This is Pennywises 8th record, their first on blahblah label, and they've finally managed to blah blah blah."

I've always done things this way, many times it gives readers a story they can relate to, because it's something they did or thought, or what have you. It's a more personal style.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm not saying it's better, but that's how I like to write the majority of the time, and while my reviews do get bitched about, like anyone elses, you're the first to really take issue with those introductions.

Anonymous (July 9, 2005)

But having a writing style doesnt mean you have to write every single review to the same jelly mould. I read every review on this site, so i'm not gonna skip over yours just because you're the reviewing equivalent of Pennywise. I'm just saying, think about mixing it up a bit.

Christ, Anchors, must you introduce everyone of your bloody reviews with a whimsical paragraph tenuously linking the band in question to your forthcoming babblings? Everyone is something along the lines of 'I remember when children weren't allowed to buy explosives ... in fact, talking of Kid Dynamite....' or 'Once upon a time, it used to be said that you couldn't fuck your friends ex, in fact, you could call it an Unwritten Law ... alluding to which, here's their new album.....'

Do you have a review generator or something?!

(And don't accuse me of pussying out and not logging in, im just a casual observer)

I think El Vaquero's comment couldn't have said it better. I mean, seriously. Plus, your link title was super lame. You're only supposed to make funny link titles if you bash the album. I mean, if you're going to rip off my techniques, you're going to have to do it in a respectable way.

When are you going to realize that without me you'd be nothing!?!

You can tell how bored I am.

I reviewed about 3-4 records that don't even come out for another month. I miss getting bitched at a couple of times a week. It gave me something to do. Now I'm stuck commenting on your reviews. Stalking you like a pervert. By the way, what are you wearing?

"I don't know the YC guys any better than you do (though I have met most of them, SWOOOOON, haha), but I've maintained the belief that with their last two albums (the Lobster one is the one that launched them, no doubt), it was never a matter of playing for TV or radio... it was about writing a terrific pop/rock record. If the media would follow along - gravy - but given the talent of the members involved, their musical education (which is well documented), etc. to me, there was no shift with an intent to appeal to the masses, even if it was obvious that the caliber of the material would make for great singles. I may be splitting hairs, but it's the same difference between a band like Greenday, and say... a band like Papa Roach, where with the latter, it's obvious that their disc wouldn't be getting released if the songs didn't have a specific formula to them, and a well amplified chorus at just the right place. My point is that it's not always so clear that just became a band is accepted by the mainstream media, that such is a byproduct of the band's intent in their songwriting/existence."

the song "ocean avenue' is clear proof that they have written music merely to appeal to the mainstream masses

Did anyone see the www.punkrocks.net review of this? That website sucks really really bad now. They never update and think they're funny. I keep telling myself I'll never go there again, but I'll check just to see how bad its gotten. It's a shame they still get ad money.

I don't know the YC guys any better than you do (though I have met most of them, SWOOOOON, haha), but I've maintained the belief that with their last two albums (the Lobster one is the one that launched them, no doubt), it was never a matter of playing for TV or radio... it was about writing a terrific pop/rock record. If the media would follow along - gravy - but given the talent of the members involved, their musical education (which is well documented), etc. to me, there was no shift with an intent to appeal to the masses, even if it was obvious that the caliber of the material would make for great singles. I may be splitting hairs, but it's the same difference between a band like Greenday, and say... a band like Papa Roach, where with the latter, it's obvious that their disc wouldn't be getting released if the songs didn't have a specific formula to them, and a well amplified chorus at just the right place. My point is that it's not always so clear that just became a band is accepted by the mainstream media, that such is a byproduct of the band's intent in their songwriting/existence.

Jordan, you're a guy who's opinion I honestly value quite a bit, so if you could, further elaborate on that?

I'm not saying that they "sold out," when they got a major label deal, but judging by their recording progression, it seems to me anyway that the change in style was a bid to be on radio/TV. That's just how I'm seeing things, cynical as it might appear.

If you go into it on that basis, all you kids who enjoyed mid-90's Fat and Epitaph bands will probably actually like this. You can't judge this on what they've done now, it's not the same band anymore. I abhor Yellowcards current incarnation, as much as Simple Plan, but this isn't bad stuff.

Lineup shifts and dreams of grandeur have taken their attention away from playing with bands like In My Eyes and Kid Dynamite to catering to the TRL crown when thereā??s no new Good Charlotte video in rotation.

--

Unnecessary, unwarranted cynicism.

Anonymous (July 8, 2005)

this band loves to eat at Hooters! you can catch em at the location where St. John's meets A1A.

It's strange, I will admitt that their older work is stronger (though still nothing to blow your load over). BUT, there is no way they could have gotten as big as they are now if they kept their old sound. It's almost as if their rise to fame required a fall to generic and mediocre.
-Dante